7 Libertarian Upstarts Who Might Help Democrats Keep Their U.S. Senate Majority

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If the Democrats control the Senate after November, Majority Leader Harry Reid might want to send thank you notes to a bunch of relatively unknown Libertarians, who, with little money and a big dependence on free YouTube videos and Facebook posts, are undercutting mainstream Republican candidates in seven states.

The Washington Post says the upstarts—Sean Haugh, Roger Roots, John Buckley, Robert Sarvis, Thom Walker, Nathan LaFrance, and Mark Fish or Dave Patterson—are attracting needed Republican votes. Who are they? A few are a bit nutty, but also appealing in perverse political ways. One is beyond creepy and should crawl back under the snake-infested rock where he came. The rest spew the party’s well-known anti-government lines. Let’s take a closer look, starting with the most intriguing.

Truth is that few who step out to Vote for these men would do so for a typical republican in any case. The few repub votes lost will be matched by an equal or larger number of Votes lost by the democrats.

40+ years in existence, not one Rep or Senator and 1.2 million wasted votes for President in 2012.

Losertarians, either vote Repub or just go the F away.

Ah, a thinking man.

"Either vote Repub or just go the F away" That's what we did in 2012. Do you know who else did that? Your Tea Party Republicans; far more of them then libertarians. Your party doesn't own anyone's vote. The party must earn every vote in every election.

The Romney Shit Sandwich may have had only half the shit of the Obama Shit Sandwich, but it was still too much shit for those of us who believe in personal freedom, personal responsibility, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

Here's a novel idea, sunshine: Don't expect Liberty-loving citizens to vote for your statist, collectivist, big government candidates, just because they have an (R) by their names. If your party can't nominate someone with a history of supporting the principles of Liberty, then don't be surprised if we leave your shit sandwich on the plate.

After all, if your own Tea Party Republicans won't support your candidates, why would expect libertarians to?

It is the right and duty of the citizen to be at all times armed.
- Thomas Jefferson

Like I said: "40+ years in existence, not one Representative or Senator and 1.2 million wasted votes for President in 2012". There is no Libertarian Party. It's a joke.

And I stand by what I said. If you support putting Democrats in office through your own action or inaction then I have no time for you. Go the F away. The worst Republican running in 2012 was better than Obama. It was a no-brainer.

"Either vote Repub or just go the F away" That's what we did in 2012. Do you know who else did that? Your Tea Party Republicans; far more of them then libertarians. Your party doesn't own anyone's vote. The party must earn every vote in every election.

The Romney Shit Sandwich may have had only half the shit of the Obama Shit Sandwich, but it was still too much shit for those of us who believe in personal freedom, personal responsibility, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

Here's a novel idea, sunshine: Don't expect Liberty-loving citizens to vote for your statist, collectivist, big government candidates, just because they have an (R) by their names. If your party can't nominate someone with a history of supporting the principles of Liberty, then don't be surprised if we leave your shit sandwich on the plate.

After all, if your own Tea Party Republicans won't support your candidates, why would expect libertarians to?

Most voters are in the center. They're just not going to vote for a truly Libertarian candidate anymore than they're going to vote for Hugo Chavez. It just won't happen.

Staying home and letting Democrats win might not be so bad if they weren't going for it all. Right now, that's exactly what they're doing. Some Senate Dems are pushing for a law taking away all abortion restrictions. Some Democrats are pushing to make sure businesses will have to choose between their livelihood or catering to gay weddings. Some Dems are pushing to make anybody pay for birth control whether they have religious convictions against it or not.

Obama has traded in five Taliban members for one member of the military. I would feel better if he wasn't a deserter who sympathized with the Taliban. It's starting to look more and more like the Obama Administration is guilty of what they're accused of regarding Benghazi. Everytime they try to prove the IRS scandal, another hard drive crashes. Anytime Obama can't have his way, he's using his executive pen.

I actually understand your feelings about wanting to stay home and not vote. I was feeling the way the other day (for opposite reasons of yours I'm sure, but still the same feeling). I can't do it. I have to go and vote, and so do others.

I actually understand your feelings about wanting to stay home and not vote. I was feeling the way the other day (for opposite reasons of yours I'm sure, but still the same feeling). I can't do it. I have to go and vote, and so do others.

There are other options beside "vote for a Republican" and "stay home", Lanie, which is the point I was making. Unless I misunderstood, you agreed with JB's statement that people who believe in liberty should vote R or not participate in the political process. That is what you meant by "That should be a bumper sticker", isn't it?.

It is the right and duty of the citizen to be at all times armed.
- Thomas Jefferson

There are other options beside "vote for a Republican" and "stay home", Lanie, which is the point I was making. Unless I misunderstood, you agreed with JB's statement that people who believe in liberty should vote R or not participate in the political process. That is what you meant by "That should be a bumper sticker", isn't it?.

To control freaks like Boehner, Graham, McCain and the Republican leadership liberty is a bad thing. Reagan ran up against the same thing.

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyesAnd clever in their own sight! Isaiah 5:20-21 NASB

There are other options beside "vote for a Republican" and "stay home", Lanie, which is the point I was making. Unless I misunderstood, you agreed with JB's statement that people who believe in liberty should vote R or not participate in the political process. That is what you meant by "That should be a bumper sticker", isn't it?.

I thought it was a cute comment. It would make a good bumper sticker.

Just to make things clear, my preference would be for people to go out and vote Republican. I don't believe other parties stand a chance in this country. I wish they did, but they usually don't. It's going to take a lot of social reform to get another party to have a lot of power. Usually, what happens whens society changes is that one or both of the parties change with them. Right now, most people (including myself) do not agree with Libertarian ideas. That's because the Libertarian party generally thinks that we shouldn't have the government fund anything except for the military (maybe a few other things). They don't believe in SNAP, welfare, or any other social program. Most Republicans would prefer these programs be reformed, but they don't want them eliminated. I live in a very conservative area and none of the conservatives I know advocate getting rid of all social programs, which is what the Libertarian Party does.

This is what Libertarians believe in. I can tell you now that most Republicans won't go for it. Maybe some on this board will, but not most of the voters.

None of the proposals currently being advanced by either conservatives or liberals is likely to fix the fundamental problems with our welfare system. Current proposals for welfare reform, including block grants, job training, and "workfare" represent mere tinkering with a failed system.

It is time to recognize that welfare cannot be reformed: it should be ended.

We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap.

4. Reform education

There can be no serious attempt to solve the problem of poverty in America without addressing our failed government-run school system. Nearly forty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, America's schools are becoming increasingly segregated, not on the basis of race, but on income. Wealthy and middle class parents are able to send their children to private schools, or at least move to a district with better public schools. Poor families are trapped -- forced to send their children to a public school system that fails to educate.

It is time to break up the public education monopoly and give all parents the right to decide what school their children will attend. It is essential to restore choice and the discipline of the marketplace to education. Only a free market in education will provide the improvement in education necessary to enable millions of Americans to escape poverty.

So, they want to end all public education. Do you see any mention of the voucher idea in there? No.

Even though I tend to agree with them on some of this, most people don't agree with decriminalizing drugs.

Drug prohibition does more to make Americans unsafe than any other factor. Just as alcohol prohibition gave us Al Capone and the mafia, drug prohibition has given us the Crips, the Bloods and drive-by shootings. Consider the historical evidence: America's murder rate rose nearly 70% during alcohol prohibition, but returned to its previous levels after prohibition ended. Now, since the War on Drugs began, America's murder rates have doubled. The cause/effect relationship is clear. Prohibition is putting innocent lives at risk.

You won't get voters to agree to that.

You have to be realistic. Unless there's a major social reform, there won't be a Libertarian President.